When observing the Brazilian public space in recent decades, it is possible to identify a constant increase in the number of religious representatives, whether as participants in debates on public policies and fundamental rights, or assuming political positions. Among them, Catholics and Evangelicals are the ones that stand out. With the imminence of becoming a majority in the National Congress, it becomes necessary to discuss how, and if it would even be possible to reconcile religion, democracy and secularism, when the faithful use of democratic public reason requires self-restraint in the use of arguments based on reasonableness and, contradictorily, at the same time, part of the participants in the public debate defend absolute truths and non-negotiable dogmas. In practice, what we have observed is a complete lack of effective debate, the antagonism between the parties is exacerbated, occurring only irrational distillations of hatred between them. Minority and vulnerable groups are the most affected here, as they see their demands stagnant or rejected. In this sense, the present work will seek to expose this problem, discussing it in a way directed to gender issues in these circumstances, focusing on women s reproductive rights and a critical and reflective exam aimed at the religious presence in the public space, more specifically through theoretical and empirical analysis on the use of religious arguments in public hearings in the Federal Supreme Court in ADPFs 54 and 442, which dealt, respectively, with the decriminalization of therapeutic anticipation of childbirth in the case of anencephalic fetuses and the decriminalization of voluntary interruption of pregnancy up to the 12th week of pregnancy.